Chlorus

Wasn't Apple's iMessage protocol supposed to be an open implementation too? Whatever happened to that?

> ". Your tools seem to be bizzarely obsessed with colors, though"

Ah, there it is. The "you don't need that feature" attitude that made desktop Linux the roaring success it is today.

> We have shown an ability to not just change code artifacts, but the protocols and languages which we use to communicate, at a very rapid rate.

Results may vary for the C language, IPv4, X11, GTK, ALSA, and massive swathes of the CoreUtils.

> "this ORM is just bad, next time we will use a different one"

...pretty sure there are competing abstraction layers to working with DBs other programming paradigms.

> OOP works on low complexity, small projects, but quickly falls apart at certain point, > More experienced people figured out some way around OOP to make it more robust,

I thought it fell apart?

> "oh, you just doing it wrong: insert excuse and advise here".

Wait til you learn what point-free style is in Haskell! Have fun!

> People who really though it through, and tried different approaches are the ones that hate it and are vocal about it.

So if you happen to like OOP, you just haven't thought it through. Thanks for the constructive comment!

Do tech support for a hospital and this attitude will very quickly dissipate.

>In my experience, the contrast is stark to another high-paid professional group: lawyers.

Database systems like WestLaw & word processing systems in the 80s and 90s were killer apps for law offices, so if lawyers are tech illiterate it's a recent phenomenon.

"You missed a trick by not naming it 'Just the Tip' or something to really convey the true spirit of the app" --> Rejected

…That is not, in fact, the (exact) definition of a paid shill. Apple would have to be paying him conditionally, with the sole intent of him advertising / defending / whatever, regardless of his actual personal opinion.

He just has a clear vested interest in the platform as is. Would we all be FOSS shills for making our living with OSS software & continuing to advocate for the conditions that make that possible?

He's referring to the mobile version of Safari, which for some reason labels 'open in new tab' as 'open in background'. If you hit 'open in new window' by mistake you end up with a split screen view that can't be swiped away with a gesture; you have to long-press the tab icon to tell it to merge the tabs in the new window together with the old one.

20th century Communists, of course, were famously tolerant of their opponents.

This is a completely worthless, ahistorical comment.

> French Revolution,

How did that turn out?

> American Revolution

There is no definition of leftism that would include the American independence movement. The conception of leftism didn't even exist!. My head is about ready to explode.

> Mexican Revolution

See French revolution.

>And the all time greatest threat to the world has been a right wing populist revolution; the rise of Nazi Germany.

Pick up a book on the Weimar Republic some day, you might learn something!

> Right wing revolutions tend to curtail rights like the Iranian Revolution

'Tend to'

I have been repeatedly informed that the Iranian revolution was a liberation from the Western Imperialists & therefore left-wing (yes, seriously).

Strangely omitted are the Russian, Chinese, & Cuban revolutions. I wonder why?

Frankly, I'm shocked the mods let this topic survive on the front-page for this long. It's a honeypot for every kind of crank to show up and start arguing (myself included) In summary, you guys need to put down the IDEs & start reading actual history books (not wikipedia & and half-assed bastardized regurgitations of Chomsky)

…it was created in September 18, 1947 as part of a reorg brought on by difficulties encountered during WWII. Pretty good foresight on their part to realize they were going to need to start a bunch of unnecessary wars!

"There is not a major political party in the US that advocates for an employment guarantee, banning private property, or withdrawing all armed forces from around the world. These are positions you would expect from a range of left parties in a parliamentary system."

That's a pretty loose definition of 'major'.

Parliamentary systems sound pretty shitty then - keep in mind the Golden Dawn, UKIP, and any one of the perennial "let's deport all the Roma" parties also counts as a major political party under your definition.